Forgotten Realms Books to Have Several Digital DLCs, Including One Featuring Asterion

Wizards of the Coast plans to release several "digital DLCs" alongside the upcoming Forgotten Realms rulebooks. This week, Game Informer released a pair of articles about the upcoming Forgotten Realms rulebooks. Tucked away in the article is the announcement that the upcoming releases will include several "digital DLCs" that expand on the new setting. One example was Asterion's Book of Hungers, which focuses on urban vampire adventures featuring the character from Baldur's Gate 3.

No other details were made available about the upcoming releases, such as whether the new supplements will be paid DLC or free to D&D Beyond subscribers. Wizards has released several digital-only supplements alongside their various books, ranging from mini-bestiaries to supplementary adventures, but all were free to D&D Beyond subscribers or available as pre-order bonuses.

Since the Forgotten Realms books aren't currently available for pre-order, it's hard to say whether this is a new strategy or simply a continuation of current works. The fact that Wizards commissioned art specifically for Asterion's Book of Hungers and the usage of the phrase "digital DLC" suggests that this might be a new monetization scheme for the company, albeit one that makes sense given the growing use of D&D Beyond's marketplace.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

I have no right to tell people not to eat meat. That is a matter for their conscience.

You have every right to tell people not to eat meat. What you don't have is a right to enforce that belief.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Im not badgering anyone. I expressed my opinion, and I’ve responded to people who have tried to argue with me about

And it has been pointed out why you are wrong. Rich people have money to spend on leisure activities, such as the cinema, a restaurant meal, gym membership, Netflix subscription or RPG books. It doesn’t matter that these things are not permanent, because they fundamentally DO NOT MATTER. No one has died because they couldn’t access their PHB.

No, the difference is that good actually exists.

I’m seeing an awful lot of evil around at the moment for something that does not exit.

longer strictly a matter of personal conscience. It’s a matter of our species survival

It would take a lot more than everyone giving up meat for our species to survive. And an awful lot of people can’t afford to be choosy about where their food comes from. Survival today is a more pressing issue than survival tomorrow.

 

[Charlaquin]

And it has been pointed out why you are wrong.

People have disagreed with me. That’s not the same thing as “pointing out why I’m wrong.” Again, discussion is the point of forums.

Rich people have money to spend on leisure activities, such as the cinema, a restaurant meal, gym membership, Netflix subscription or RPG books. It doesn’t matter that these things are not permanent, because they fundamentally DO NOT MATTER. No one has died because they couldn’t access their PHB.

What? When did I ever imply people have died from lack of access to RPG books??

I’m seeing an awful lot of evil around at the moment for something that does not exit.

There is certainly a lot wrong in the world right now. That’s not the same thing as evil. But, whatever, I don’t care to debate philosophy with you.

It would take a lot more than everyone giving up meat for our species to survive.

It sure would, but reforming the meat processing industry is something we will have to do to survive, among many other things. Again, you seem to be under the impression that people can only care about one issue at a time, which is very strange to me.

And an awful lot of people can’t afford to be choosy about where their food comes from.

Right, which I already acknowledged and said it is therefore all the more incumbent upon those of us who can afford to make those choices to do so, and to be vocal about why we’re doing so.

Survival today is a more pressing issue than survival tomorrow.

And, again, it is possible - necessary, even - to care about both things at once.

 

[ECMO3]

Supporting the meat processing industry is no longer strictly a matter of personal conscience. It’s a matter of our species survival. If someone cares about the meat processing industry’s disastrous effects on the environment but still wants to eat meat, there are ways of pressuring the industry that don’t require cutting meat completely out of one’s diet. Some of those ways are not financially accessible for many, so it is all the more incumbent on us who can afford to make such changes to do so, and to be vocal about why we are doing so.

When it comes to good and evil I think forcing actions on another is certainly not "good" even when those actions are well intentioned and even if they are actually a matter of survival.

Even if people's choice to eat meat does actually destroy our species, that does not mean it is good, moral or right to tell someone not to eat meat. It is a matter of freedom and personal choice - you be you and let me be me.

This is aside from the fact that no science anywhere indicates the environmental impact of the meat industry will actually destroy our species. Kill tens of millions of people over the 21st century - yes ..... possibly cause the downfall of our modern civilization - unlikely but theoretically possible ..... eliminate the entire species, currently at 8+ billion humans and growing - no, not even close.

 

[Charlaquin]

When it comes to good and evil I think forcing actions on another is certainly not "good" even when those actions are well intentioned and even if they are actually a matter of survival.

Even if people's choice to eat meat does actually destroy our species, that does not mean it is good, moral or right to tell someone not to eat meat. It is a matter of freedom and personal choice - you be you and let me be me.

When have I ever told anyone not to eat meat? I eat meat. “The meat processing industry needs to make major changes” and “no one should eat meat ever” are wildly different sentiments.

This is aside from the fact that no science anywhere indicates people eating meat will actually destroy our species. Kill tens of millions of people over the 21st century - yes ..... possibly destroy our modern civilization - unlikely but theoretically possible ..... eliminate the entire species, currently at 8+ billion humans and growing - no, not even close.

Ok. Forgive me for short handing “tens of millions of people will die and modern civilization will probably be destroyed” to “our species won’t survive.” I’m sure that distinction will be a great comfort to the handful of people with enough wealth to insulate themselves against the environmental devastation that will kill the rest of us.

 

[Dire Bare]

When have I ever told anyone not to eat meat? I eat meat. “The meat processing industry needs to make major changes” and “no one should eat meat ever” are wildly different sentiments.

Ok. Forgive me for short handing “tens of millions of people will die and modern civilization will probably be destroyed” to “our species won’t survive.” I’m sure that distinction will be a great comfort to the handful of people with enough wealth to insulate themselves against the environmental devastation that will kill the rest of us.

You are engaging with posters who do not argue in good faith (or good sense) . . . an exercise in frustration.

 

[ECMO3]

Ok. Forgive me for short handing “tens of millions of people will die and modern civilization will probably be destroyed” to “our species won’t survive.” I’m sure that distinction will be a great comfort to the handful of people with enough wealth to insulate themselves against the environmental devastation that will kill the rest of us.

It is a major distinction. 70 Million people die every single year worldwide, more than will die due to the effects of climate change over the entire 21st century (according to the WHO). Of the 7 Billion or so people that will die this century, less than 1 percent are scientifically expected to be the result of climate change.

You need to use facts based in science and reason if you want a reasonable discussion.

The biggest reason we can't get any reasonable discussion on climate change is the hyperbole. Spell out specifically and accurately what will happen instead of trying to use alarmist wording like "our species survival".

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

10/10 thread drift